To believe the judicial supremacist lie, that the courts rule over us, no matter how immoral or unconstitutional their opinions, you have to believe some really unbelievable, ridiculous, and even frightening things.

You have to believe that Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego were wrong. They should have gone ahead and bowed down to Nebuchadnezzar's golden idol.

You have to believe that the Apostles were wrong. They should have shut up about the Gospel of Jesus Christ when they were told by civil authorities to do so.

You have to believe that the great Roman statesman Cicero was wrong, that there is no universally-applicable natural law which binds all men everywhere, throughout time.

You have to believe that Augustine was wrong when he said that, "an unjust law is no law at all."

You have to believe that Thomas Aquinas was wrong when he said that, "Human law is law only by virtue of its accordance with right reason; and thus it is manifest that it flows from the eternal law. And in so far as it deviates from right reason it is called an unjust law; in such case it is no law at all, but rather a species of violence."

You have to believe that William Blackstone was wrong when he said, "this natural law, being as old as mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, from this original.”

You have to believe that Samuel Adams was wrong when he said that, "[A]ll men are equally bound by the laws of nature, or to speak more properly, the laws of the Creator."

You have to believe that Alexander Hamilton was wrong when he said that, “The Sacred Rights of Mankind...are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the Hand of the Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power," and that "the judiciary... has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments."

You have to believe that Thomas Jefferson was wrong when he said that, "it is a very dangerous doctrine to consider judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions. It is one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy."

You have to believe that all of America's founders were wrong when they challenged and defeated the supreme civil authority of that old tyrant King George III.

You have to believe that Abraham Lincoln was wrong when, in his first Inaugural Address, he said that, "if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers..."

You have to believe that Justice Taney should have been obeyed into perpetuity when he pronounced in the infamous Dred Scott opinion that black men were not human beings.

You have to believe that it was fine for a tinpot probate judge to pronounce a literal death sentence by dehydration and starvation on a helpless disabled woman, Terri Schindler Schiavo, and that it was acceptable to have the entire legal and political establishment of Florida and of the United States stand passively by as her tormentors tortured her to death by cruel and unusual means.

You have to believe that it's just fine that, by judicial decree, and through the passive connivance of a whole generation of American lawyers and politicians, more than fifty-five million defenseless babies have been brutally slaughtered, even though those same politicians swore a sacred oath to God to provide equal protection for the right to life of every person under their jurisdiction

You have to believe that nobody can do a thing when judges, in gross violation of the laws of nature and nature's God, and contrary to every single clause of the stated purposes of the Constitution of the United States, invent an imaginary "right" for a man to "marry" a man, or for a woman to "marry" a woman, even though such a perverted thing is physically, naturally, impossible.

You have to believe that our Constitution, and our republican form of government, with its necessary checks and balances, is a dead letter.

You have to believe that the sacred oath of office is nothing more than a formality or a photo op.

"Opinions are sometimes right, and sometimes wrong. But they aren't law.

In the early days of our government, Supreme Court opinions were so insignificant that Congress didn't bother preserving them. Opinions were left to individuals to keep track of, and were not congressionally-funded into official records until 1874, almost a century after our independence. Before Congress stepped in, Court records were printed and kept under copyright by private citizens and reporters, who sold them for profit.

Opinions of the Court were kept "loosey-goosey" for decades, and not preserved with certified integrity. Actual statute was held officially and carefully, in order to preserve its certainty as law.In 1874, when Congress had decided to finally begin funding and overseeing the printing of Supreme Court opinions, while leaving their actual production to be handled privately, it moved its own code away from private printers to be solely handled by the U.S. government.

To this day, the actual production of Court opinions is done by contract to private entities. (You are apparently even invited, as a private citizen, to help out with any errors before the official printing!)By contrast, actual federal code, the statute that is "on the books" because it went through the constitutional process of lawmaking, remains meticulously and faithfully produced by the U.S. government, start to finish.

Supreme Court opinions have always been treated as inferior to the United States code--because they are not the "law of the land.""

'Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain.'

Tom Hoefling on Government:

"Just as 'good fences make for good neighbors,' good government is mainly about knowing where the legitimate boundaries are, and having the courage to defend those borders forcefully. This is true in terms of the defense of our territory, our security, and our national sovereignty, but it also applies to the sworn duty of all of those in government to equally protect the God-given, unalienable rights of each individual person, from their creation onward, their sacred obligation to stay well within the enumerated powers of our constitutions, and of the role legitimate government must play in balancing the competing rights and interests of the people, in order to establish justice."